Are Factory Jobs Making A Comeback? Some Offering Over $80K A Year
According to the White House, manufacturing jobs are roaring back under President Trump. The report says the rebound in manufacturing jobs was led by the automobile sector, which gained 8,900 new jobs in February, 2025—after losing 27,300 auto jobs in 2024. Trump insists that the new administration will supercharge the country's domestic base. The truth is there's a cultural nostalgia around factory jobs, known as 'smokestack nostalgia"--a time when Americans worked in good solid jobs for generations. But is it a dream or delusion that factory jobs are making a resurgence?
U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick says factory gigs are the 'great jobs of the future' for Gen Z amid the administration's efforts to fuel a multi-generational manufacturing boom. But not if Gen Zers have anything to do with it, according to Mike Goetsch, head of product at Soter. The problem is that Gen Z isn't interested in factory work, he says because they believe they're low-paying, dead-end jobs. The typical Gen Zer is looking for micro-shifts or flexible gig jobs that provide free time and work-life balance.
Factory jobs have gotten a bum rap among Gen Z, partly because they have misleading, dinosaur images of what's involved in manufacturing jobs. A 2023 Soter report finds only 14% of Gen Z say they'd consider industrial work as a career path. A college degree used to be a ticket to stability, but not anymore. More business leaders are saying, "Ditch the 4-year degree." And tech workers are facing layoffs, slower wage growth and the quiet disappearance of roles as AI redefines the white-collar landscape.
Experts declare what was once a clear path is now a moving target, demanding constant reinvention. Some say it's a temporary shakeup due to the pandemic, inflation or corporate efficiency efforts. But others envision a deeper shift underway, and see it as a make-it or break-it moment for employers in the manufacturing sector who need to step up.
In the Suter report, 38% of Gen Zers say they don't know what industrial workers do, indicating a clear lack of education around industrial work. Goetsch says that's why it's not surprising that a measly 14% of Gen Zers would consider industrial work. Although 26% of Gen Z thinks industrial work is a good short-term job, they don't see it as a long-term option. 'It's clear the Secretary of Commerce's POV that factory jobs are great long-term career options is at odds with Gen Z's perspective,' Goetsch asserts.
According to Goetsch, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the average rate of manufacturing employee turnover is currently 39.9% (up from 30.6% in 2017). He states that this statistic is exacerbated by the fact that fewer young people are entering the industry, and a wave of baby boomers are retiring.
Due to these labor concerns, he points out that manufacturers are increasing salaries to attract new talent, citing the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics' average manufacturer hourly earnings $35.06, up 4.3% year-over-year.
'Within the manufacturing sector, there are other specialties outside production and operations positions like machine operators. For example, Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) professionals like EHS Engineers make an average salary of $83,342 per year or $40.07 per hour,' he explains. "The top 10% makes over $115,400 per year, which is an incredibly lucrative career path Gen Zers should consider. Part of the challenge is amplifying these opportunities and informing young people that these opportunities don't only exist but can be excellent paths for great salaries.
According to the National Association of Manufacturers, there were 400,000 open jobs for factory workers in February 2025, and employers are having trouble filling those positions, even though factory jobs look very different today than in the 1950s.
I asked Goetsch how leaders can attract Gen Z to some of the lucrative factory jobs, and he mentions the importance of cracking the myth. 'If employers don't adequately work to debunk some of the perceptions Gen Zers hold about industrial work at large," he told me, 'they risk disappearing their workforce, which could foil the administration's plans to revive the manufacturing sector.'
He is convinced that one of the best ways to do that is to re-frame the narrative that these jobs aren't cutting-edge or tech-forward. 'A third (33%) of Gen Zers say they want to work for a company that is actively embracing new tech to help employees do their jobs,' Goetsch notes. 'While an emphasis on tech and automation might have been a perk or a non-issue to previous generations (or even a pain point for older generations), for Gen Z, it's a priority. However, only 18% of Gen Zers surveyed said they believe industrial work is embracing new technology.'
Goetsch argues that the majority of industrial sectors have fallen far behind on tech and innovation, compared to their corporate counterparts, and Gen Zers know it. "While there has been recent interest in more cutting-edge tech in the industrial workplace, there is a need for more plentiful–and more strategic–investment in tech if industrial employers want to prioritize Gen Zers' job criteria," he insists.
There is some good news along these lines. Myron Moser, chairman emeritus of Hartfiel Automation and business consultant Dhaval Jadav, are counseling their manufacturing clients to navigate the 'automation chasm' on how factories can recruit and manage expectations of younger workers, preparing them for a more automated future.
Goetsch cites Soter as a great example of companies that can attract Gen Zers to factory jobs. 'We use AI and computer vision to help EHS professionals identify hazards, risks and violations on the factory floor within about 30 seconds, and with 99% accuracy,' he concludes. 'Gen Z, having grown up immersed in digital technology, is less inclined to tolerate manual processes. Faced with repetitive, outdated tasks, they are likely to not only lose patience but to write off the entire industry if it seems antiquated.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Investing in Cedar Woods Properties (ASX:CWP) three years ago would have delivered you a 108% gain
By buying an index fund, you can roughly match the market return with ease. But if you choose individual stocks with prowess, you can make superior returns. Just take a look at Cedar Woods Properties Limited (ASX:CWP), which is up 80%, over three years, soundly beating the market return of 22% (not including dividends). On the other hand, the returns haven't been quite so good recently, with shareholders up just 62%, including dividends. Let's take a look at the underlying fundamentals over the longer term, and see if they've been consistent with shareholders returns. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. While markets are a powerful pricing mechanism, share prices reflect investor sentiment, not just underlying business performance. One flawed but reasonable way to assess how sentiment around a company has changed is to compare the earnings per share (EPS) with the share price. Cedar Woods Properties was able to grow its EPS at 29% per year over three years, sending the share price higher. This EPS growth is higher than the 22% average annual increase in the share price. So one could reasonably conclude that the market has cooled on the stock. We'd venture the lowish P/E ratio of 11.71 also reflects the negative sentiment around the stock. You can see below how EPS has changed over time (discover the exact values by clicking on the image). We know that Cedar Woods Properties has improved its bottom line lately, but is it going to grow revenue? You could check out this free report showing analyst revenue forecasts. What About Dividends? When looking at investment returns, it is important to consider the difference between total shareholder return (TSR) and share price return. Whereas the share price return only reflects the change in the share price, the TSR includes the value of dividends (assuming they were reinvested) and the benefit of any discounted capital raising or spin-off. Arguably, the TSR gives a more comprehensive picture of the return generated by a stock. We note that for Cedar Woods Properties the TSR over the last 3 years was 108%, which is better than the share price return mentioned above. This is largely a result of its dividend payments! A Different Perspective We're pleased to report that Cedar Woods Properties shareholders have received a total shareholder return of 62% over one year. And that does include the dividend. Since the one-year TSR is better than the five-year TSR (the latter coming in at 13% per year), it would seem that the stock's performance has improved in recent times. In the best case scenario, this may hint at some real business momentum, implying that now could be a great time to delve deeper. While it is well worth considering the different impacts that market conditions can have on the share price, there are other factors that are even more important. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 3 warning signs with Cedar Woods Properties , and understanding them should be part of your investment process. Of course Cedar Woods Properties may not be the best stock to buy. So you may wish to see this free collection of growth stocks. Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on Australian exchanges. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US, China to launch new talks on tariff truce extension, easing path for Trump-Xi meeting
By David Lawder STOCKHOLM (Reuters) -Top U.S. and Chinese economic officials will resume talks in Stockholm on Monday to try to tackle longstanding economic disputes at the centre of a trade war between the world's top two economies, aiming to extend a truce by three months and keeping sharply higher tariffs at bay. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with President Donald Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end weeks of escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals. Without an agreement, global supply chains could face renewed turmoil from U.S. duties snapping back to triple-digit levels that would amount to a bilateral trade embargo. The Stockholm talks come hot on the heels of Trump's biggest trade deal yet with the European Union on Sunday for a 15% tariff on most EU goods exports to the U.S., including autos. The bloc will also buy $750 billion worth of American energy and make $600 billion worth of U.S. investments in coming years. No similar breakthrough is expected in the U.S.-China talks but trade analysts said that another 90-day extension of a tariff and export control truce struck in mid-May was likely. An extension of that length would prevent further escalation and facilitate planning for a potential meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in late October or early November. A U.S. Treasury spokesperson declined comment on a South China Morning Post report quoting unnamed sources as saying the two sides would refrain from introducing new tariffs or other steps that could escalate the trade war for another 90 days. Trump's administration is poised to impose new sectoral tariffs that will impact China within weeks, including on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, ship-to-shore cranes and other products. "We're very close to a deal with China. We really sort of made a deal with China, but we'll see how that goes," Trump told reporters on Sunday before European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen struck their tariff deal. DEEPER ISSUES Previous U.S.-China trade talks in Geneva and London in May and June focused on bringing U.S. and Chinese retaliatory tariffs down from triple-digit levels and restoring the flow of rare earth minerals halted by China and Nvidia's H20 AI chips and other goods halted by the United States. So far, the talks have not delved into broader economic issues. They include U.S. complaints that China's state-led, export-driven model is flooding world markets with cheap goods, and Beijing's complaints that U.S. national security export controls on tech goods seek to stunt Chinese growth. "Geneva and London were really just about trying to get the relationship back on track so that they could, at some point, actually negotiate about the issues which animate the disagreement between the countries in the first place," said Scott Kennedy, a China economics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "I'd be surprised if there is an early harvest on some of these things but an extension of the ceasefire for another 90 days seems to be the most likely outcome," Kennedy said. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has already flagged a deadline extension and has said he wants China to rebalance its economy away from exports to more domestic consumption -- a decades-long goal for U.S. policymakers. Analysts say the U.S.-China negotiations are far more complex than those with other Asian countries and will require more time. China's grip on the global market for rare earth minerals and magnets, used in everything from military hardware to car windshield wiper motors, has proved to be an effective leverage point on U.S. industries. TRUMP-XI MEETING? In the background of the talks is speculation about a possible meeting between Trump and Xi in late October. Trump has said he will decide soon on a landmark trip to China, and a new flare-up of tariffs and export controls would likely derail planning. Sun Chenghao, a fellow at Tsinghua University's Center for International Security and Strategy in Beijing, said that a Trump-Xi summit would be an opportunity for the U.S. to lower the 20% tariffs on Chinese goods related to fentanyl. In exchange, he said the Chinese side could make good on its 2020 pledge to increase purchases of U.S. farm products and other goods. "The future prospect of the heads of state summit is very beneficial to the negotiations because everyone wants to reach an agreement or pave the way in advance," Sun said. Still, China will likely request a reduction of multi-layered U.S. tariffs totaling 55% on most goods and further easing of U.S. high-tech export controls, analysts said. Beijing has argued that such purchases would help reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China, which reached $295.5 billion in 2024.
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal
HONG KONG (AP) — A Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal said Monday it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, a move that could please Beijing but bring more U.S. scrutiny to the geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison Holdings' initial plan to sell its port assets to a group that includes U.S. investment firm BlackRock Inc. pleased President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the critical shipping lane's operations in Panama. However, they apparently angered Beijing and drew a review from Chinese anti-monopoly authorities. A Beijing-backed newspaper posted scathing commentaries about the deal, with one describing it as a betrayal of all Chinese. Beijing's offices overseeing Hong Kong affairs have reposted some of these commentaries, widely seen as an indication of Chinese leaders' stance. A Hutchison subsidiary has operated ports at both ends of the Panama Canal since 1997. After months of uncertainty brought by tensions between Washington and Beijing, Hutchison said in a statement that the exclusive negotiations period with the consortium has expired. However, it added 'the Group remains in discussions with members of the consortium with a view to inviting major strategic investor from the PRC to join as a significant member of the consortium,' referring to the People's Republic of China. It said they needed to change the membership of the consortium and the structure of the transaction for the deal to be able to pass reviews by 'all relevant authorities." The awkward position Hutchison found itself in for months highlights the challenges Hong Kong business elites face in navigating Beijing's expectations of national loyalty, especially when relations between China and the United States are strained. Hong Kong has overhauled its electoral system to ensure the city is run by 'patriots.' CK Hutchison is owned by the family of Hong Kong's richest man, Li Ka-shing. It announced March 4 that it would sell all its shares in Hutchison Port Holdings and in Hutchison Port Group Holdings to the consortium that also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping Company. In May, Hutchinson co-managing director, Dominic Lai told shareholders that Terminal Investment was the main investor. Its parent company is led by Italian shipping scion Diego Aponte, whose family reportedly has a longstanding relationship with Li's. The initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at either end of the canal. That agreement also required approval from Panama's government. The deadline for their exclusive negotiation period ended on July 27. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
